On 2016-09-09 05:07, Ray Jewhurst wrote:
Lesson learned. I will stick to Bitsavers for my info. As far as rotate,
I did know about that and because of that and other reasons, I am going
to back off on the S and I think I will concentrate on the Straight-8.
Manuals are always good. Sometimes drawing are even better. But it does
take much more time to read through than a FAQ. :-)
(And personally, I think that anyone who wants to deal with an 8/S must
be crazy... :-) )
Johnny
On Sep 8, 2016 11:01 PM, "Johnny Billquist" <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On 2016-09-09 04:40, Ray Jewhurst wrote:
My source pertaining to the serial bus on the S being the basis
for the
Omnibus I got straight from the FAQ. To be more specific it
pertained to
the easy configurability of the 2 busses.
The FAQ isn't always right. :-)
I don't think it makes any sense at all to compare the 8/S with the
Omnibus. I just did a quick check, and some controllers were usable
both on the straight 8 and the 8/S, such as the PC02, PC03, CR03C,
AA01A and probably others... So I would say that the straight 8 and
8/S was pretty much the same, as far as peripherals were concerned.
And as far as I remember, these were pretty much the same on the 8/I
as well. Check the manuals if you want more details. :-)
And I just found the difference in the OPR instruction for the 8/S
compared to other models, that I had some vague memory of.
On the 8/S, the Increment AC bit cannot be combined with any
rotates, since they are both done in the same clock cycle.
As far as I can remember, only the 8/S have this property, and on
other models, it is a clearly defined sequence of the different OPR
bits, with increment happening before rotates.
Johnny
On Sep 8, 2016 10:27 PM, "Johnny Billquist" <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
<mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>> wrote:
Bob, you are right in that the PDP-5 used address 0 for the
PC, and
put the saved PC at address 1 at interrupts, which is not
compatible
with the PDP-8, and means any interrupt driven code will not
work
across the PDP-5 and PDP-8.
Not sure what you mean by 0/1 for interrupts. Maybe you mean
that 0
is where the pre-interrupt PC is saved, and execution starts
at 1?
Anyway... As far as the early PDP-8 models go, the 8/S is
the odd
ball out. As far as I can remember, a bunch of OPR
combinations did
not work the same (or at all) on the 8/S, compared to any other
PDP-8 model. So special care needs to be taken when you write
something for an 8/S. Apart from that, the machines are mostly
upward compatible, indeed. The Omnibus machines added a few new
things, but yes, you normally use various undocumented
opcodes to
tell the machines apart. RAR RTR is the one I know the best, but
there are probably others too.
Kermit-12 is a good source if people want to check how to
tell which
model it is running on, since that program does a pretty
decent job
of identifying pretty much all machines.
Ray Jewhurst mentioned that the serial bus of the 8/S was
the basis
for the Omnibus - that is backwards and wrong in several
ways. First
of all, I'm not sure the bus was serial on the 8/S. The CPU
was serial.
Second, the Omnibus is most definitely not serial, and I also
seriously doubt there are any relationship at all between the
Omnibus and anything on the 8/S. Third, I have some vague memory
that the Negibus was used on 8/S, but I should probably look
that up.
Johnny
On 2016-09-09 03:53, Bob Supnik wrote:
The PDP-5 is, in fact, not all that compatible, because
it used
memory
location 0 as the PC, pushing the interrupt locations to
1/2,
instead of
0/1. So any program requiring interrupts will not work
on a -5
vs an -8.
The PDP-5 had an IO halt/restart facility, modeled on
the PDP-1 and
dropped from the PDP-8, which allowed an IOT to "wait" for
completion
without looping and testing a flag. It does not seem to have
supported
an EAE or extended memory.
The PDP-8 family (8, 8/S, 8/I and variants, 8/E and
variants,
8/A) are
superset compatible for defined operations. It's possible to
tell them
apart based on their behavior on undefined operations.
The code for
identifying a PDP-8 is out there, but I don't have it at
hand. I
remember that the behavior of RAL RAR and RTL RTR was
one way of
telling
the 8, 8/S, and 8/I apart.
Most of the work for supporting models would be in the
peripherals,
particularly the ones that are 'compatible' across the
line (reader,
punch, terminals, clock). The pre-Omnibus machines used the
older style
IOP1, IOP2, IOP4 pulse methodology; the Omnibus machines can
decode all
8 possible combinations. Beyond that, peripherals tended
to be
distinct:
the RK8 for the 8/I vs the RK8E for the Omnibus
machines; the
Type 552
DECtape controller for the -5 and -8 vs the TC01/TC08
for the later
machines.
The "CMOS 8s" are a whole different kettle of fish. They
were
only used
in word processing/DECmate systems and had many unique
features.
/Bob
On 9/8/2016 9:10 PM, [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
<mailto:[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Message: 1
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2016 18:57:52 -0400
From: Ray Jewhurst<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
<mailto:[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>>
To: simh<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>>
Subject: [Simh] PDP-8: The possibilities?
Message-ID:
<camfeaable-s+qszmm4axyr8pqhx3dpkiadjb_auxqo5hahe...@mail.gmail.com
<mailto:camfeaable-s%[email protected]>
<mailto:camfeaable-s%[email protected]
<mailto:camfeaable-s%[email protected]>>>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
After both reading and participating in some recent
discussions, I got to
thinking that maybe the array of PDP-8 models could
be better
represented.
I say this because from what I have read very early
PDP-8
code is not
100%
compatible with later models conversely the PDP-5 is
compatible with the
early code and likewise uses a negibus like the
Straight-8.
I thank this
could be a rewarding experience for some of us and
since I
can't work I
would be able to help coordinate, write pseudo code
and beta
test. If
anyone is interested in this let the discussion begin.
Thanks
Ray
_______________________________________________
Simh mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
<mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh
<http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh>
<http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh
<http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh>>
--
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
<mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> ||
Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" -
B. Idol
_______________________________________________
Simh mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
<mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh
<http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh>
<http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh
<http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh>>
--
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> ||
Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol
--
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: [email protected] || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol
_______________________________________________
Simh mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh
